[Tagging] new key civilization

john at jfeldredge.com john at jfeldredge.com
Wed Jan 12 02:22:35 GMT 2011


Having civilization as a subkey to historic is a good suggestion.

-------Original Email-------
Subject :Re: [Tagging] new key civilization
From  :mailto:danielsabo at gmail.com
Date  :Tue Jan 11 19:35:13 America/Chicago 2011


For clarity, could these be subtags of historic?
e.g.
historic=ruins
historic:civilization=roman
historic:period=aurelia

That way we can have more descriptive tags without worrying about conflicts with non-historic meanings.

On Jan 11, 2011, at 4:35 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:

> 2011/1/11 John F. Eldredge <john at jfeldredge.com>:
>> Perhaps one could have separate tags for civilization and era.  After all, many of these civilizations overlapped to some degree, timewise, while being in different parts of the world.  In some cases, the different civilizations traded with each other (for example, the Roman and Chinese civilizations traded with each other, through intermediaries).
> 
> 
> yes, era is not what I am looking for. I used to tag the time
> component (in rare cases) with the key "period", e.g. period=aurelian
> for one of the city walls of Rome:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurelian_Wall.
> 
> cheers,
> Martin
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tagging mailing list
> Tagging at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging


_______________________________________________
Tagging mailing list
Tagging at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging

-- 
John F. Eldredge -- john at jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly
is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria


More information about the Tagging mailing list